QAWG --
Here is a first-cut proposal for a seriously stripped down SpecGL/ET
component ("SpecLite").
As a result of earlier work, I realized that most of what we wanted to do
in the 46 checkpoints of CR SpecGL could be located, at least in part, in a
good Conformance Clause. So I wrote a "FooML Conformance Clause" in
outline/skeleton form [1]. It's a template that's a stripped-down version
of what I did for NIST and posted in January.
Having got a version of a conformance clause that I would be happy to see
in FooML, then I took a version of CR SpecGL's checklist and chopped it
down to a set of rules that might lead to the Conformance Clause as a good
fulfillment of the rules [2].
Some overall principles:
1.) I think much (most?) of what we did in CR SpecGL is good stuff, but
need to be "layered". First exposure to users should only reveal a
fraction of the detail. So there will be at most 1/4 - 1/3 as many "rules"
at the top level of SpecLite-GL and SpecLite-template.
2.) Most of the rest of our stuff is still useful, but ought to become
techniques in SpecLite-ET, or reference articles that can be drilled down
to and found by the curious "advanced user".
3.) Accordingly, I usually tried to "hide" jargon like DoV, CoP, etc, while
preserving the important concepts. (We did get feedback that the DoV
concepts were a useful and unique contribution. So we need to make 'em a
little less fierce looking.)
4.) I think that all the stuff that survives in the top level of SpecLite
could probably be grouped under 3-4 principles (Modules for SpecGL). But I
didn't try to go there and define the modularization (too abstract for me
at this point).
Apologies that it is rough and unfinished, and probably there are some
inconsistencies between [1] and [2] -- but hopefully the basic ideas come
through, sufficient for discussion.
-Lofton.
[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2004/03/SpecLite-template.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/2004/03/SpecLite-checklist.html